Councilwoman Barbara Shanklin answers questions put to her during council court charging attorney David Tachau on cross-examination. July 30, 2013

Metro Councilwoman Barbara Shanklin held on to her job this week by one thin vote.

But her reputation is in tatters. So is the image of the entire, 26-member Metro Council following the sad, months-long spectacle of Ms. Shanklin's alleged misdeeds and the six-day hearing held by the council over whether her self-dealing, casual management of city funds and payments or favors to relatives merited her removal from office.

Thursday, members of the Metro Council decided it did not. Though the vote was 13-7 in favor of removing her from office, the law requires a "super-majority" of 14 votes for removal. It fell short by one.

The outcome didn't sit well with the five-member committee that recommended to the council it proceed with the trial, or hearing, to seek the removal of Ms. Shanklin, a Democrat from Louisville's 2nd District. The bi-partisan "Charging Committee" - whose members did not get to vote-issued a sharply critical statement afterwards.

"We believe this episode has severely damaged the public's view of the entire Metro Council," it said. "We hope that one day the council can recover the respect of the electorate."

Nor was council member Kelly Downard, a Republican who voted for her removal, very happy.

"I have never been so embarrassed to be a member of an organization in my life," he said.

Ms. Shanklin's conduct was just as disgraceful and embarrassing as that of the late Councilwoman Judy Green, a West Louisville dentist who died after she became the first city legislator to be expelled from office since 1865.

The council voted in 2011 to removed Ms. Green for mismanaging city money including $35,000 in funds for a "Green Clean Team," a jobs program whose employees including 10 of her relatives.

Ms. Shanklin routed about $75,000 in grant money to a neighborhood association that she controlled, signing most of the checks and through which she paid relatives for services such as catering and grass cutting. Some of the money went for "emergency aid" to various families in the area.

She also set up a program to offer upholstery classes for ex-offenders, using $38,000 in public funds, that appeared primarily to benefit her, her relatives and friends. In testimony she was unable to identify a single ex-offender who ever took the class before the city cancelled the program.

Yet seven of the council members hearing Ms. Shanklin's case decided it didn't merit removal, even though-incredibly -three of the seven found she was guilty of misconduct for her management of $75,000 in neighborhood grants.

Before voting on whether to remove her, the council voted 16-4 that she had in fact committed misconduct over managing the neighborhood association funds.

Yet three of them then switched sides to decide Ms. Shanklin shouldn't lose her job. Council members Brent Ackerson, David Tandy and Attica Scott (who won the seat vacated by Ms. Green) joined the four members opposed to removing Ms. Shanklin from office.

The other four voting to keep Ms. Shanklin in office were Mary Woolridge, Cheri Bryant Hamilton, David James and Dan Johnson.

The vote appeared to divide along partisan and racial lines. All seven Republicans on the council voted to remove Ms. Shanklin, an African American who represents the Newburg community of Louisville. All five African Americans on the council voted to retain her.

Some council members likely were distracted by shenanigans of Ms. Shanklin's lawyer, Aubrey Williams, who-at times theatrically-worked hard to divert attention from the facts of the case and arouse sympathy for "this angelic woman" who "carried the torch" for her constituents, many of them low-income.

And in the end some members may have let their friendship or sympathy for Ms. Shanklin influence them, an inclination they were urged to avoid by lawyer David Tachau, hired by the council to act as prosecutor.

"I know you have an affection for her but that doesn't mean she is beyond the reach of the law or deserves a free pass," Mr. Tachau said. "If you acquit her, you are saying you don't care."

Maybe some members of the council don't care. But the voters should care.

Now the voters must decide whether Ms. Shanklin is fit to remain in the office she has held for 10 years.

That same consideration should be given to all council members at the next election.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Editorial | Barbara Shanklin is saved by a vote

Metro Councilwoman Barbara Shanklin held on to her job this week by one thin vote.